or ‘those of equal numbers of rains’?
4. Independent usages of samānavassika in Ṭīkās, etc
4.2 Vajirabuddhi’s Anugaṇṭhipada in Vajirabuddhiṭīkā 428,12–17
Among the Vinaya subcommentaries, only the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā (ca. 10th c. CE),47 has an independent passage that takes up samānavassika. In fact this is quoted from an earlier lost Vinaya commentary, namely from Vajirabuddhi’sAnugaṇṭhipada (ca. 7thto 10thc. CE). The quotation has been dealt with and translated into German inKieffer-Pülz (2013: III: [Z 289], pp. 1760ff.). The following is a revised English rendering of that translation:
“‘[The going for refuge for novices is] like the formula for the legal act for the ordination for monks:48 As in this context a fully ordained [monk], having given up the training,49 solely clad with an upper and under robe,50 when later [re]ordained, again pays respect, etc., to a [monk] of equal [numbers of] rains who previously had been his junior (or:
to [a monk] who previously had been of equal [numbers of] rains [and] his junior),51so too a
47. For the dating of the text, see Kieffer-Pülz 2013: I 70–106; Dimitrov (forthcoming) 2.9.
48. Sp V 1014,23–26 = Pālim 161,12–14: so sace ākiṇṇadoso va hoti, āyatiṃ saṃvare na tiṭṭhati, nikkaḍḍhitabbo. atha sahasā virajjhitvā “duṭṭhu mayā katan” ti puna saṃvare ṭhātukāmo hoti, liṅganāsanakiccaṃ natthi. yathānivatthapārutass’ eva saraṇāni dātabbāni, upajjhāyo dātabbo, sikkhā-padāni pana saraṇagamanen’ eva ijjhanti. sāmaṇerānaṃ hi saraṇagamanaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ upasampada-kammavācāsadisaṃ, tasmābhikkhunā(so Sp Ce EeNeSe; Sp BeEen.7 Nen.7; Pālim Be bhikkhūnaṃ) viya catupārisuddhisīlaṃimināpi dasa sīlāni samādinnān’ eva honti. evaṃsante pi daḷhīkaraṇatthaṃ āyatiṃ saṃvare patiṭṭhāpanatthaṃ puna dātabbāni. “If he (i.e. the novice) remains impure, does not abide in restraint in the future, he is to be thrown out [of the monastery]. Or, if, having inconsiderately failed, [with the thought] “this was done badly by me”, he wishes to again abide in restraint, there is no need of an outward sign expulsion (literally “destruction/abandoning of the outward sign (i.e. the robe)”;liṅganāsanā).
To him indeed, being still dressed in upper and under robe, the [three] refuges are to be given, [and] a preceptor is to be assigned; the rules, however, are accomplished by the mere going for refuge (i.e. they need not separately be given), because for novices the going for refuge is like the legal act for full ordination for monks. Therefore, as the fourfold virtue consisting in purity [is taken up] by a monk [implicitly with the ordination procedure, so] the ten virtue [rules] are taken up indeed [implicitly with the going for refuge]
even by such a one (i.e. by a novice who failed and later decided to abide in restraints); [but] even though it is like that, the [rules] are to be given again for strengthening, in order to establish in restraint for the future.”
The reading bhikkhūnaṃfor bhikkhunāseems to be exclusive to the Burmese tradition. It could have slipped into the text under the influence of the bhikkhūnaṃof the preceding sentence. The commentaries Vjb, Sp-ṭ and Vmv do not comment on it, neither do Pālim-pṭ and Pālim-nṭ in the respective passages concerning Pālim. The Burmese Jāgara, however, had before him the readingbhikkhunāas is documented by his Vinaya subcommentary,the Pācityādiyojanā(Pāc-y 257,20f.:bhikkhunāsamādinnaṃviya imināpi samādinnān’ eva hontīti yojanā. “As [the fourfold virtue consisting in purity] is taken up by a monk, [so the virtue rules] are indeed taken up even by such a one (i.e. the last-mentioned novice), [that is] the syntactical construction”). What speaks for the readingbhikkhunāis that with it the simile is balanced: each element in the comparison, has a counterpart in the compared (bhikkhunā– imināpi, catuparisuddhisīlaṃ– dasasīlāni).
This is not the case if we accept the readingbhikkhūnaṃ. The counterpart forbhikkhūnaṃis missing in the compared, and, likewise, the counterpart in the comparison for the instrumental imināpi used in the compared section is missing. Aggacitta Mahāthera, however, considers the Burmese readingbhikkhūnaṃthe better, understandingimināpias referring not to the novice, but to the “going for refuge”: “Since, for novices the going for refuge is like the formula for the legal act of higher ordination for monks, therefore – like the fourfold purification of morality for monks [is already observed with the formula] – [so] the ten rules of morality are already observed with this [going for refuge] too." (Translation Aggacitta Mahāthera, email 12.
and 15.01.2016).
49. I.e. having left the Community.
50. I.e. he keeps his monks’ clothes, though he is no longer a monk.
51. A third possibility is to understand navakatarassa and samānavassikassa as referring to two different persons: “he again pays respect, etc., to a [monk] who previously had been his junior [and] to [a monk
novice who has taken the threefold refuge [anew], again pays respect to a novice of equal [numbers of] rains who previously had been his junior (or: to [a novice] who previously had been of equal [numbers of] rains [and] his junior). [Therewith] it is said that in this context (ettha) the outward sign (liṅga, i.e. the robe) does not effect seniority,’ [thus] it is said [in Vajirabuddhi’s Anuganthipada52].”
Vjb 428,12–17: “bhikkhūnaṃ upasampadakammavācāsadisan ti (Sp 1014,24–25) ettha yathā upasampanno sikkhaṃ paccakkhāya yathānivatthapāruto va hutvā pacchā upasampanno pubbe attano navakatarassa samānavassikassa puna vandanādīni karoti, evaṃ sāmaṇero pi puna gahitasaraṇo tato pubbe attano navakatarassa samānavassikassa sāmaṇerassa puna vandanādīni karoti. liṅgaṃ pan’ ettha vuḍḍhatarabhāvaṃ na sādhetī ti vuttaṃ hotī” ti vuttaṃ.
What stands in the fore in this passage from Vajirabuddhi’s Anugaṇṭhipada is to state that robes do not effect seniority. If a monk leaves the Community,53 but keeps his robes, the robes do not make him a monk. If he wants to be ordained again, the time period he spent in monks’ robes after his disrobal does not count for his ordination age. The same holds true for the novice. This is illustrated with an example, for which two translations are suggested above. According to the first suggestion, navakatarassa and samānavassikassa both are considered as referring to one and the same person, and the pubbe as being related to navakatarassaonly. This leads to the assumption that the monk when reordained, has to pay respect to a monk who then is of equal rains, but previously had been his junior. This would mean that the reordained monk now has an equal number of rains with the formerly younger monk, and it would imply that the years he spent in robes before his disrobal still count.
Solely the time period between his disrobal and his reordination would be detracted from his ordination age.54 Only then could he after reordination be of equal rains with the formerly younger monk. For, if the time of his earlier monkhood was not counted, then after his new ordination he would be junior – and not of the same age – to the one who formerly was his junior. Understood in this way,55 Vajirabuddhi’s Anugaṇṭhipada would imply that all time periods spent as a monk are counted for the calculation of his ordination age. The
Anugaṇṭhi-previously] of equal [numbers of] rains”. In this casepubbewould have to be linked withnavakatarassaand samānasaṃvassikassa. If the years of a monk after his disrobal were excluded in case of his reordination then this monk when ordained again would have to pay respect to everybody in that monastery who received upasampadā before him. Thus no reason is recognizable why only one previously younger and one previously of equal rains should be mentioned. In addition the two terms are not connected by “and” (ca) which renders it unlikely that the two words refer to two different persons. This, however, probably is the interpretation of Ñāṇasaddhamma in his Nissaya to the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā (see below, pp. 96f.).
52. In theVajirabuddhiṭīkāthe wordvuttaṃis used to indicate quotations from Vajirabuddhi’sAnugaṇṭhipada (Vjb 131,3f.), see Kieffer-Pülz 2013: I 126; 508f.
53. Formally leaving the Community requires an intentional verbal statement formulated in the present tense with one or other of the keywords listed in theAṭṭhakathā, or synonyms of them, in the presence of a second person that immediately understands what has been said.
54. As a counter argument against this interpretation Aggacitta Mahāthera asks whether we then would not expect the text to read pubbe attano navakatarassa etarahi (pana) samānavassikassa (email 15.12.2015).
Naturally this would be much clearer, but the problem is that we know little of the mode of expression of Vajirabuddhi, the author of the Anugaṇṭhipada, and that legal texts often contain very short statements, omitting all words which can be understood from a preceding passage. Since we here have only a quotation from the Anugaṇṭhipada, and thus do not have access to the text preceding our passage, we cannot know what was said there. Therefore, we have to discuss all possible options.
55. This is the manner in which Kieffer-Pülz 2013: III [Z 289] understood the text. Aggacitta Mahāthera (email 15.12.2015) considers this an overreading of the passage.
95
pada, a commentary intended at least partly for a South Indian clientel, often deviates from mainstream Mahāvihāra interpretations and transmits opinions of minorities. Therefore we cannot exclude the possibility of an interpretation deviating from mainstream Mahāvihāra.
The complete absence of comparable statements in all other commentaries known to date does not allow us to verify the status of this statement. The suggested interpretation, however, stands in opposition to present day practice, in which years as a monk before a disrobal are not counted for the ordination age after a reordination.56
According to the second suggestionnavakatarassaandsamānasaṃvassikassaalso refer to one and the same person, but pubbe is linked with both adjectives. Hence the text would state that the monk after his reordination has to pay respect to [a monk] who previously had been of equal [numbers of] rains [and] his junior. From the point of view of content this makes sense as shown by the example given in the Visuddhimagga and discussed above (3.1.1, and see n. 8). For, even if two monks are of equal rains their actual monastic age deviates up to just under one year if they are not ordained simultaneously in one legal act.
Thus one samānavassika monk can be younger or older than another one, which is directly reflected in the way the monks address one another: the younger one addresses the older one with the respectful bhante, the elder the younger one with āvuso. If we follow this interpretation the text would simply give one example of a monk who previously stood farther below the reordained monk in the monastic hierarchy, and now stands higher up. The text would not imply any information on the validity of the earlier years spent as a monk.57 This interpretation is in accord with present day usage.
In Chaṅ Tai Sayadaw Ñāṇasaddhamma’s58 Vajirabuddhiṭīkā-Nissaya, written in 2348 BE (= 1804 CE) as it is accessible at the moment59 the Pāli text of the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā is transmitted in exactly the same way as in the various editions of theVajirabuddhiṭīkā. But in translating the Pāli into Burmese, Ñāṇasaddhamma, renders it as if the Pāli text contained an
“and” (ca),60 without, however, discussing this discrepancy. The relevant sentence thus runs as follows:
“… when later he receives ordination, he again pays respect, etc., to a monk who formerly was his junior and to a monk formerly of the same [monastic] age”.61
According to Lammerts the syntax of the Burmese is quite explicit that two different monks
56. Information by Anālayo Bhikkhu in the discussion forum of the E-learning course on “Women in Buddhism” of the Numata Zentrum für Buddhismuskunde, University of Hamburg in Summer 2015.
57. This is the interpretation favoured by Aggacitta Mahāthera (email 15.12.2015), especially in the light of the Visuddhimagga passage (above, 3.1.1).
58. This author (1744–1816), also known under the name Ñāṇālaṅkāra is one of the most prolific Nissaya glossators of his time, especially on Vinaya texts. (Lammerts, email 3.12.2015).
59. Vjb-niss (printed edition from 1980). Since the printed edition is no critical edition it would be necessary to check several manuscripts to gain certainty regarding the reading.
60. Aggacitta Mahāthera (email 12.05.2015) understands it as “or” (vā). According to Lammerts (email 3.12.2015) at the time of the author the expression (laññḥkoṅḥ) is ambiguous, being used in the sense ofca or vādepending on the context; only later is vārendered assau laññḥ koṅḥ. Lammerts (email 6.1.2016) notes that glossators often comment upon alternative readings when they are suggested by the Pali. That this is not the case here may signify that Ñāṇāsaddhamma did not recognize any difficulties in his source text.
61. Vjb-niss II 307,8–11:pacchā| nok mha ||upasampanno| pañcaṅḥkhaṃso rahanḥsaññ ||pubbe| n* |attano
| mi mi aok ||navakatarassa|ṅay so sū āḥlaññḥkoṅḥ||samānavassikassa| tūso vārhi so sū āḥlaññḥkoṅḥ
||puna| ta phan ||vandanādīni| tui. kui ||karoti yathā| kai. sui. || (Transliteration and translation, Lammerts, email 5.1.2016).
are meant here. In that case one would expect the Pāli text to have contained a “ca” twice, namely in the example of the monk, and in that of the novice. None of the editions of the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā provide such a ca, neither does the Nissaya in the Pāli section. From the point of view of content the question arises as to why two persons should have been mentioned, one younger and one of the same rains, since a monk starts at the bottom of the hierarchy and has to again pay respect to each monk if his earlier years as a monk are excluded. Thus it would have been sufficient to mention one of the two. Especially since the term samānavassika alone does not automatically imply that a monk is of the exact same monastic age or younger.
Independent of which interpretation one prefers the passage clearly shows that samānavassika – as in all other sources – is used in the sense “of equal [numbers of] rains”.
Conclusion
Samānavassikais a word rarely used in the canon, and mostly in the context of the invitation ceremony. The Vinayaitself does not contain an explanation or definition of the compound.
But from the point of view of content it is clear that, contrary to the assumptions of Rhys Davids/Oldenberg and Horner, samānavassika can not mean “[monks] who spent the rains together”, but rather “[monks] who spent equal [numbers of] rains” in robes, that is monks of the same monastic age (within the range of just under one year). This is the only meaning documented in the entire Pāli literature up to the nineteenth century CE as far as it is accessible to date via data banks. Thus the relevant entry in the Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary has to be corrected as well as the respective sentences in all English translations of the Vinaya.62 For an easy overview of the various canonical references for samānavassika the respective passages and the existing translations are put together in the following Appendix.
Appendix: The canonical references for samānavassika° and their translations
The following are the passages in which the compound samānavassika° appears in the Vinaya, accompanied by the translations from the two extant Vinaya translations,63 and suggestions for new alternative translations:
(1) Vin I 168,25f. (Mv IV 15.1): anujānāmi bhikkhave samānavassikaṃ pavāretun ti.
“I allow, O Bhikkhus, that all the Bhikkhus who have kept Vassa together, perform Pavāraṇā (by one common declaration).” (VinTexts I 338).
“I allow you, monks, to invite those who keep the rains (all) together.” (BD IV 221)
“I allow, monks, to invite with [groups of monks of] equal [numbers of] rains.” (New suggestion)
(2) Vin I 169,3–4.16–18.32–34; 170,7–8 (Mv IV 15.3,4,6,7): yadi saṃghassa pattakallaṃ, saṃgho dvevācikaṃ ekavācikaṃ samānavassikaṃ pavāreyyā ti.
“If the Saṃgha is ready, let the Saṃgha hold Pavāraṇāwith the twofold formula, or with the
62. Vinaya Texts by Rhys Davids & Oldenberg; Book of the Discipline by Horner. This also holds true for Horner’s translation recently published by Sutta Central, see below n. 63.
63. Horner’s translation has been published online by SuttaCentral 2014 with “supplementary translation by Bhikkhu Brahmali” (https://suttacentral.net/downloads; last access 18.11.2015). Since the portion in question here, was not changed (see Bhikkhu Sujato’s comment, p. 73; see the translations, pp. 1629ff.;
2767), it is not listed separately.
97
onefold formula, or by common declaration of all the Bhikkhus who have kept Vassa together.64“ (VinTexts I 339)
“If it seems right to the Order, the Order may invite those who keep the rains together by a twofold formula, by a onefold formula.”65 (BD IV 221ff.)
“If the Community is ready, the Community may invite with two utterances, one utterance, with [groups of monks of] equal [numbers of] rains.” (New suggestion)
(3) Vin I 170,35–171,1 (Mv IV 16.4,5):dvevācikāya ce bhikkhave, ekavācikāya ce bhikkhave, samānavassikāya ce bhikkhave pavāraṇāya bhāsitāya lapitāya pariyositāya (respectively:
apariyositāya) pavāraṇaṃ ṭhapeti, aṭṭhapitā (respectively: ṭhapitā) hoti pavāraṇā.
“When Pavāraṇā, O Bhikkhus, is pronounced, declared, and finished [respectively: not finished] with the twofold fomula, with the onefold formula, by common declaration of all Bhikkhus who have kept Vassa together, and if (a Bhikkhu then) inhibits the Pavāraṇā (of another Bhikkhu), the Pavāraṇā is not inhibited [respectively: inhibited].” (VinTexts I 342)
“If, monks, one suspends an invitation when the invitation has been spoken, uttered and brought to a close [respectively: but not brought to a close] by a/the twofold formula … by a/
the onefold formular … by those keeping the rains together, and [the] invitation comes to be not (duly) [respectively: comes to be (duly)] suspended.” (BD IV 224).
“Monks, if one suspends the invitation [of some monk] when the invitation is spoken, uttered, brought to a close [respectively: not brought to a close] with two utterances, with one utterance, with [groups of monks of] equal [numbers of] rains, the invitation is not suspended [respectively: is suspended].” (New suggestion)
(4) Vin V 123,23–26 (P VI 3):aparāpi tisso pavāraṇā: tevācikāpavāraṇā, dvevācikāpavāraṇā, samānavassikāpavāraṇā.
—66
“And three further invitations: invitation by the threefold formula, invitation by the twofold formula, invitation of those keeping the rains (all) together.67 (BD VI 193)
“And three further invitations: invitation with three utterances, invitation with two utterances, invitation with [groups of monks of] equal [numbers of] rains.” (New suggestion).
Acknowledgments
This article originated from a discussion proposed by DhammadinnāBhikkhunī, and led between her, Aggacitta Mahāthera, and me. The discussion evolved around the interpretation of the passage from the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā dealt with above (4.2). This passage was brought forward in the discussion forum of the E-learning course on “Women in Buddhism” of the Numata Zentrum für Buddhismus-kunde, University of Hamburg in Summer 2015. The interpretation of this text passage made plain that the precise meaning of the compound samānavassika was not entirely understood in secondary literature. Aggacitta Mahāthera checked the canonical usage of compounds with vassika, and introduced the BurmeseNissayainto the discussion. He, furthermore, read the last few versions up to the final one of this article, and added significant critique and substantial comments, which are taken up in this final version. DhammadinnāBhikkhunīread several later versions, and enriched the article with numerous essential comments and additions. D. Ch. Lammerts put a copy of the edition of the Vajirabuddhiṭīkānissaya at my disposal, and provided me with a wealth of information (only a
64. Rhys Davids/Oldenberg add the “common declaration” without marking it as an addition here.
65. Whereas in Mv IV 15.1 as well as in Mv IV 15.4,5 Horner took dvevācikaṃ, ekavācikaṃ, and samānavassikaṃ as three separate entities, she here relates samānavassikaṃ as accusative object to pavāreyya, and understands dvevācikaṃ and ekavācikaṃ as modal adverbs.
66. VinTexts does not contain a translation of the Parivāra.
67. Horner (BD VI 193, n. 22) hints at the fact that invitation with a single utterance is not mentioned here.
fraction of which is reflected here) on its author. He, in addition, transliterated, translated and examined the Burmese phrase in question from a grammatical point of view, and compared the author’s general writing style with it. Finally, Alastair Gornall checked and improved my English. To all of them I express my sincere gratitude. It goes without saying that all shortcomings are my own.
Abbreviations
Be Edition in Burmese script; refers to the Chaṭṭhasaṅgāyana edition if not indicated otherwise.
BD I. B. Horner [Transl.],The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-Piṭaka),6 Vols., London, 1938–1966 (SBB 10, 11, 13, 14, 20, 25).
BudSir Buddhist Scriptures Information Retrieval, Mahidol University, Thailand.
Ce Ceylonese edition.
Childers Childers Robert Caesar, A Dictionary of the Pāli Language, 4th ed. London, 1909.
Chs Chaṭṭhasaṅgāyana Edition, publ. Buddha Sasana Council, Rangoon, 1956ff.
Cp Cariyāpiṭaka, in:Buddhavaṃsa and Cariyāpiṭaka, new edition by N. A. Jayawickrama, London:
PTS, 1974.
CPD A Critical Pāli Dictionary, begun by V. Trenckner, ed. D. Andersen, H. Smith, H. Hendriksen, Vols. 1–3, Copenhagen, 1924ff.
CSCD Chaṭṭhasaṅgāyana CD-ROM, Version 3.0 (Igatpuri: Vipassana Research Institute, 1999).
D Dīghanikāya, 3 vols., ed. T. W. Rhys Davids, J. E. Carpenter, London: PTS, 1890–1911.
Dhp Dhammapada, ed. O. von Hinüber and K. R. Norman, with a complete Word Index compiled by Shoko Tabata and Tetsuya Tabata, Oxford: PTS, 1995.
DOP Margaret Cone, A Dictionary of Pāli, Part I: a–kh. Oxford, 2001; Part II: g–n. Bristol, 2010 (PTS).
Ee European edition.
Horner see BD
Khuddas Dhammasiri, Khuddasikkhā
Be CSCD [according to verses – counted continuously].
Ee Edward Müller [ed.], “Khudda-sikkhāandMūla-sikkhā”, JPTS 1883, 88–121 [according to chapters and verses].
Khuddas-nṭ Sumaṅgalappasādanī nāma Khuddasikkhā-abhinavaṭīkā, in: Khuddasikkhā-Mūlasikkhā, Khuddasikkhā-Purāṇa-Abhinava-Ṭīkā, Mūlasikkhā-Ṭīkā, Rangoon: Chs, 1962.
Khuddas-pṭ Khuddasikkhā-purāṇaṭīkā, in:Khuddasikkhā-Mūlasikkhā, Khuddasikkhā-Purāṇa-Abhinava-Ṭīkā, Mūlasikkhā-Ṭīkā, Rangoon: Chs, 1962.
Kkh Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī by Bhadantācariya Buddhaghosa, ed. K.R. Norman, William Pruitt. Oxford:
PTS, 2003.
M Majjhimanikāya, 3 Vols., ed. V. Trenckner, R. Chalmers, London: PTS, 1888–1899.
MW Monier Monier Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Oxford, 1899.
Ne Nāgari edition.
Nidd I Mahāniddesa, parts I and II, ed. L. de la Vallée Poussin, E. J. Thomas, London: PTS, 1916–1917.
Pāc Pācittiya rule.
Pāc-y Jāgara, Pācityādiyojanā, Rangoon: Chs, 1972.
Pālim Sāriputta [from Poḷonnaruva], Pālimuttakavinayavinicchayasaṅgaha (Vinayasaṅgahaṭṭhakathā), Rangoon: Chs, 1960.
Pālim-nṭ Toṅ-phī-lā charā tō Munindaghosa [Tipiṭakālaṅkāra, Pālimuttakavinayavinicchayanavaṭīkā]
Vinayālaṅkāraṭīkā, 2 Vols., Rangoon: Chs, 1962.
Pālim-pṭ Sāriputta [of Poḷonnaruva, Pālimuttaka-vinayavinicchaya-purāṇa-ṭīkā] Pālimuttaka Vinaya Vinicchaya Saṅgaha-ṭīkā, rev. K. Pannasara. Matara: Sudarsana Press/Colombo Jinālaṅkāra Press, 1908/2451.
PED The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary, ed. T. W. Rhys Davids, W. Stede, London: PTS, 1921–1925.
PTS Pali Text Society.
pw Otto Böhtlingk, Sanskrit-Wörterbuch in kürzerer Fassung, 4 Bde., St. Petersburg, 1879–1889.
Rhys Davids & Hermann Oldenberg see VinTexts.
Se Siamese edition, see BudSir.
SBB Sacred Books of the Buddhists.
Sn Suttanipāta, ed. Dines Andersen, Helmer Smith, London: PTS, 1913.
Sp Samantapāsādikā, Vinayaṭṭhakathā [if not specified Sp refers to Ee].
Be CSCD.
Ce Samantapāsādikānāma Vinayaṭṭhakathā, 4 parts; pt. 1 ed. Baddegama Piyaratana Thera, Väliviṭiye Paṇḍita Sorata Thera; pt. 2 Väliviṭiye Pemaratanatthera, Sirimatā Baddegama
99
Piyaratana Mahāthera, Paṇḍita Sorata Thera; pt. 3–4 Väliviṭiye Pemaratanatthera, Paṇḍita Sorata Thera; Colombo: Bauddha saṃskṛtika madhyasthānayē aṭṭhakathā vyāpṛtiye prakāśanaya, 2055/2012.
Ee Samantapāsādikā, Vinayaṭṭhakathā,7 vols., ed. J. Takakusu, M. Nagai (and K. Mizuno in vols. 5 and 7). London: PTS, 1924–1947; vol. 8 : Indexes Hermann Kopp. London: PTS, 1977.
Ne [NālandāEdition]Samantapāsādikānāma Aṭṭhakathā, 3 parts, ed. Nathmal Tatiya, Birbal Sharma, et al. Patna: Nava Nālandā-Mahāvihāra, 1964, 1965, 1967.
Se BudSir.
Sp-ṭ Sāriputta [of Poḷonnaruva], Sāratthadīpanīṭīkā, 3 vols. Rangoon: Chs, 1960.
Th Theragātha, in:Thera- and Therī-Gāthā,ed. Hermann Oldenberg and Richard Pischel, rev. K. R.
Norman, L. Alsdorf, second ed., London: PTS, 1966.
Vin Vinaya Piṭaka, 5 vols., ed. Hermann Oldenberg. London, 1879–1883.
VinTexts T. W. Rhys Davids, Hermann Oldenberg [Transl.], Vinaya Texts, 3 Vols., Oxford University Press, 1881–1885 (Sacred Books of the East, 13, 17, 20).
Vin-vn Buddhadatta, Vinayavinicchaya Be CSCD.
Ee Buddhadatta, Vinayavinicchaya, in:Buddhadatta’s Manuals,pt. 2:Vinayavinicchaya and Uttaravinicchaya, Summaries of the Vinaya Piṭaka, ed. A. P. Buddhadatta, London: PTS, 1927, 1–230.
Vin-vn-ṭ Vinayavinicchayaṭīkā (Vinayatthasārasandīpanī), 2 vols. Rangoon: Chs, 1977.
Vism Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga, 2 vols., ed. C.A.F. Rhys Davids. London: PTS, 1920–1921.
Vism transl. Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga. The Path of Purification, translated from the Pāli by Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli, Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 2010 (Original Colombo, 1956).
Vjb Vajirabuddhiṭīkā, Rangoon: Chs, 1960.
Vjb-niss Chaṅ tai charātau [= Hsinde Sayadaw] Ñāṇālaṅkārabhisaddhammadhajamahādhammarājaguru, Vajirabuddhiṭīkānissaya. 2 vols. Yangon: Piṭakabyūhā aphvai., 1980 [written 1804].
Vmv Coliya Kassapa, Vimativinodanī-ṭīkā, 2 vols. Rangoon: Chs, 1960.
Vs(s). verse(s)
Bibliography
Chung 1998 = Jin-il Chung, Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (Sanskrit-Wörterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden, Beiheft 7).
Dimitrov (forthcoming) = Dragomir Dimitrov, The Legacy of the Jewel Mind.
von Hinüber 1968 = Oskar von Hinüber, Studien zur Kasussyntax des Pāli, besonders des Vinaya-Piṭaka, München.
Kieffer-Pülz 1992 = Petra Kieffer-Pülz, Die Sīmā. Vorschriften zur Regelung der buddhistischen Gemeindegrenze in älteren buddhistischen Texten. Berlin: Reimer Verlag (Monographien zur indischen Archäologie, Kunst und Philologie, 8).
--- 2005. “Ehejahre oder Lebensjahre? Die Altersangabe für eine ‘verheiratete’ Frau (gihigatā) in den Rechtstexten der Theravādin”, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 155/1, 199–
238.
--- 2013. Verlorene Gaṇṭhipadas zum buddhistischen Ordensrecht. Untersuchungen zu den in der Vajirabuddhiṭīkā zitierten Kommentaren Dhammasiris und Vajirabuddhis, 3 vols. Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag (Veröffentlichungen der Indologischen Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1).
Ṭhānissaro 2007 =Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu,The Buddhist Monastic CodeII,The Khandhaka Rules, USA, 2ndrev.
ed. (Original 2001).
Tieken 2002 = Hermann Tieken, “The Buddhist PavāraṇāCeremony According to the Pāli Vinaya”,Journal of Indian Philosophy 30/3, 271–289.
Vajirañāṇavarorasa 1973 = Somdet Phra MahāSamaṇa Chao Krom PhrayāVajirañāṇavarorasa,The Entrance to the Vinaya. Vinayamukha, Vol. II, Bangkok: Mahāmakut Rājavidyalaya Press.
ARIRIAB Vol. XIX (March 2016): 101–123
© 2016 IRIAB, Soka University, JAPAN